Is Mitch Lewis best 22 (23) when available?

[Hawkspot]

lol of course he is.

As soon as he’s fit, and confident in his body, he is our full forward. We have had success in spite of him not being there, we’d be even better with him.

Anyone that tells you they don’t have a fit Mitch Lewis in our best instantly outs themselves as not understanding our side, Lewis, and footy.

I think what we’re doing without him, Dear, and others is not being given enough recognition because Sam’s a ****ing genius and makes it look deliberate.

 

[sven_inc]

A fit and healthy Lewis makes Chol better. He provides us even more flexibility in the form of a pack marking KPF.

I’ve posted this before, but he’s everything we would want from a potential trade in target - big, strong, athletic, great age profile, not the finished product and leadership material.

He’s also never really played in a good Hawthorn team and now has the potential to.

I’m pumped to see what he can do!

 

[H00t]

There’s a pretty big difference between Lewis at his best and at his worst. When in full flight he’s dominant. Yet he can also have longs periods of time of being fairly uncompetitive.

That will be the challenge for Burge. Not just getting him up to play but getting him at 100% where nothing will hold him back.

Personally would like to see him dominate a VFL game or two not just go through the motions at that level.

 

[I wanna pash Nash]

As an aside, if we have a fit Lewis do we really need Allen?

 

[Iceman!]

I'm going to add a bit more context to other answers.

Yes, but not straight away. The amount of time since he has played consistent footy will mean he'll need a fair bit of game time before he's a lock best 22.

We certainly haven't moved past Lewis because I don't think you've sold him for what he's best at. He's not a full forward, he's a searching CHF. When he was playing his best he was covering 14 or 15km a game, clunking marks on the wing, outside 50, kicking them long. Even with Lewis' limited game time over the past 5 years he's had the same number of shots from outside 50 as Gunston, Chol and Dear combined.

I see him as the CHF, I see Dear as the FF and I see Chol as the third tall / part time ruck. We can carry all 3, in my opinion.

I think we definitely give the 3 talls a go, i am not certain it will work and will be persisted with but is very much a wait and see. I think it was Hodge yesterday said it's very hard to play 3 talls and i tend to agree.

I am not sure i love running Meek, Lewis, Chol and Dear in the same line up. I do think any 2 of those plus Meek and guys like Weddle and Sicily that can be swung forward for moments.

 

[MadDawg]

 

[The Chad and I]

When fit and in form, yes.
But he's rarely been available on a consistent basis.
On that track record he can't be relied upon for our success, and we have to make plans without him as Plan A.

Anything he does is a bonus.

 

[earthworms]

He will probably get a few games in the VFL (1 to 3) then come back into the side

 

[cs61]

I think you're missing the point with a lot of this. You're not always going to be able to move the ball quickly, you're not always going to be able to spot up a target inside 50. We haven't moved past outlet kicks or long shots at goal, we're just playing to the plan that works with the players we've got.

When you have someone who can take a contested mark on the wing it provides an option and it frees up other players because the opposition now have to be aware of that option and defend it. When you have someone who can line up and kick a decent shot for goal outside 50, a defender needs to honour that player when they lead up at the ball and it eases congestion I50 for the other players to get free.

Do you know which teams averaged the most shots from outside 50 last year? All 4 preliminary finalists. More avenues to goal are better, and the quickest way to goal through congestion is over the top of it.

I remember when we were playing really well in 2012 when Buddy and Hodge were out injured, and the media asked to Clarkson if we were a better side with them not in the team. Clarkson literally laughed at the question. While we aren't missing anyone the same value, Mitchell was also asked if its been an unexpected bonus (luck) with our injuries to our 2 key forwards given the many small forwards is working ok so far. He didn't laugh like Clarkson did, but Mitch did say straight away that it obviously affects our ball movement both around the ground, and into 50. When we have those players out as we can't be aggressive with the long exit kick nearly as much. Also our smalls will play a hell of a lot better when they get the tall support around them.

 

[Scooter_1968]

Yes

On SM-A546E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ReturningHawk]

2022 was 3 years ago...
2023 had some decent games without setting the world on fire

Your memory is not serving you well.

Mitch setting the world on fire with a BOG performance in 2023:
Hawthorn 105 - Collingwood 73

Mitch setting the world on fire again in 2023:
Hawthorn 98 - Brisbane 73

And again:
Hawthorn 142 - Eagles 26

Game has changed massively since hes had an extended run of games, just unsure if a slow cumbersome FF is required with how this side plays,

Charlie Curnow also looked pretty slow and cumbersome last week. Tall players coming off a serious injury just look slow and cumbersome. But watch the above highlights and you'll remember that he's a handful in the air, and more than handy at ground level. Great aerobic capacity, covers the ground really well - but apart from him being our best KPF he is also an important leader of this group. I remember his second half against Port a couple of years ago, we got an unearthly shellacking in the first half and he absolutely dug in and dragged us back to get the better of Port in the second half. If he can keep his body right from here then he is absolutely a chance at being our next captain.

 

[kenneje]

Yes.

Fit and in form he’s second picked on the team sheet behind our captain.

 

[ReturningHawk]

Buddy was my absolute favourite player but the side was better after he left for Sydney
team balance > the individual

No it wasn't. Winning after he left proved that we didn't rely on Buddy, not that we were magically better without him ffs. Starting to think this is a troll.

 

[KermitJagger]

I think we definitely give the 3 talls a go, i am not certain it will work and will be persisted with but is very much a wait and see. I think it was Hodge yesterday said it's very hard to play 3 talls and i tend to agree.

I am not sure i love running Meek, Lewis, Chol and Dear in the same line up. I do think any 2 of those plus Meek and guys like Weddle and Sicily that can be swung forward for moments.

It's hard to play 3 traditional talls, maybe, but neither Chol or Dear are traditional talls. Last season Chol was one of the best forward pressure players in the comp, he was 12th for Tackles I50. Both were top 10 for tackles by key forwards.

At our best through the threepeat we had Rough, Gunston, Buddy, Hale all crowding the forward line. None traditional talls, so there was no problem. Last year we played our best footy with Gunston, Dear and Chol. Sydney did alright with Amartey, McLean and McDonald and they are all traditional, low movement sort of talls.

Might take a bit of getting used to but I don't think there's a fundamental problem with it.

 

[marklar]

Yes.

And we make adjustments to the team and playing style to make it work. We can absolutely do this.

 

[JRH]

what does mitch look like with the forward line we have on the park at the moment? If he was playing out of the goal square with chol running further afield I think we take more marks inside 50 and kick more goals per game. Also frees meek up a bit if chol can ruck more. We took 13 marks inside 50 last week, surely Mitch clunks a few extra.

 

[Iceman!]

It's hard to play 3 traditional talls, maybe, but neither Chol or Dear are traditional talls. Last season Chol was one of the best forward pressure players in the comp, he was 12th for Tackles I50. Both were top 10 for tackles by key forwards.

At our best through the threepeat we had Rough, Gunston, Buddy, Hale all crowding the forward line. None traditional talls, so there was no problem. Last year we played our best footy with Gunston, Dear and Chol. Sydney did alright with Amartey, McLean and McDonald and they are all traditional, low movement sort of talls.

Might take a bit of getting used to but I don't think there's a fundamental problem with it.

I think it is less about can it work and is it optimal for how we want to play.

I think if anything Sydney might be the counter point, i think they were succesful despite the talls not because of them.

I am totally okay with us trialling it if and when all 3 are fit and i can see a world where it works, i don't think it is necessarily a guarantee to be the best way forward for us.

 

[Hawked Wings]

Yeah he’s not best 22


He’s best 10

 

[Bedi]

If we have a fit and firing Mitch Lewis in our side, no shit, we will win the next 3 flags.

 

[HedgeFund]

There's no such thing as an objective Best 22.

Teams very rarely get to pick from a full list.

When Mitch Lewis has fully recovered from his knee injury and played a couple of VFL games to get the requisite match fitness, then he should return to the senior side.

Our forward line looked much better last week with 2.5 tall forwards (Chol, Gunston/Sicily). I don't think Lewis would be left out if fully fit because we don't need a second genuine KPF next to Chol. We need one for sure.

 

[CliffMcTainshaw]

You can bet that Mitch has already put a lot of thought into how the forward line will work when Lewis and Dear return.

 

[detox]

Lewis has had limited time at full fitness.

In those times he has had it, he has proven he's elite.

To answer the question, a fully fit lewis for an extended time is probably the missing peice for a flag.

Heres hoping the rest of his body will benefit for the rest.

On SM-S928B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[cryptor]

You can bet that Mitch has already put a lot of thought into how the forward line will work when Lewis and Dear return.

Goes to sleep with a big smile on his face thinking about it.

 

[hawkman]

A 100% fit Lewis probably yes but if Dear improves he may not be. A 90%-95 fit Lewis I'm not sure he is. He is probably competing with Dear for a spot as Chol also provides 2nd ruck back up and Lewis won't be risked there

 

[Tall poppy Syndrome]

I think we definitely give the 3 talls a go, i am not certain it will work and will be persisted with but is very much a wait and see. I think it was Hodge yesterday said it's very hard to play 3 talls and i tend to agree.

I am not sure i love running Meek, Lewis, Chol and Dear in the same line up. I do think any 2 of those plus Meek and guys like Weddle and Sicily that can be swung forward for moments.

On the 3 talls question, Crows are an interesting watch atm with Tex, Thilthorpe and Fogarty - all are absolute brutes.

Has worked very well for them so far this season with 2 games admittedly very much on their terms.

Interestingly last year when we went on our winning run, aside from the disaster at Kardinia Park the only game where I felt for a while we got absolutely dominated was against the Crows at Adelaide Oval in the first quarter. I know we weren’t far behind on the scoreboard at at quarter time but it felt like much more. Their marking talls were very prominent in that.

But then the remaining 3 quarters demonstrated the flip side risks, with us running and chaining out of their tall forward line at will. In the end we ran them off their feet and won by 10 goals or so.